In a bail matter, the Court noted the prima facie case against the applicant. It held that disputed questions of fact regarding the applicant's role could not be examined at this stage and ordered the petitioner to approach the Trial Court.
Application disposed of; liberty to raise the contention before the Trial Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
ISM
1 22.529.19 apl.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 529 OF 2019
Jagdish Balkrishna Sapte
.....Applicant
V/s.
Seniro PI and another
.....Respondents
Mr. Shantanu R. a/w Mr. Swarup Patil i/b Mr. Shivaji Yadav for the Applicant
Mr. Deepak Thakare PP for the State Smt. S. P. Shinde APP for the State
CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI & NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ.
DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2019.
P.C.
Heard.
contention before this Court is, no specifc role has been assigned to
applicant and so called two bouncers were not acting under his supervision or as per his instructions.
2 22.529.19 apl.doc
him raise it before Trial Court before appropriate Judge.
[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.] [B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.]
Jagdish Balkrishna Sapte
Seniro PI and another
Nitin W. Sambre
B. P. Dharmadikari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
